TMI Blog1990 (8) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This is an appeal from the order of the Customs, Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called `the CEGAT') dated 24th October, 1988 under Section 35-L(b) of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). 2. The appeal which the CEGAT disposed of had been filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Guntur against the order of the Collector of Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding and held that the appellant would be eligible to claim refund of duty paid by them in this regard. 4. Lamination, indisputably by the well settled principles of excise law, amounts to `manufacture'. This question, in our opinion, is settled by the decisions of this Court. Reference may be made to the decision of this Court in Empire Industries Ltd. Ors. v. Union of India Ors. - [1985 (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be available to the appellant under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 6. The further contention urged on behalf of the appellant that the goods belong to the same entry is also not relevant because even if the goods belong to the same entry, the goods are different identifiable goods, known as such in the market. If that is so, the manufacture occurs and if manufacture takes place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
